本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

advmat-scope-fit

Use when deciding whether a materials result clears Advanced Materials' advance-and-broad-impact gate, or whether it belongs in Advanced Functional Materials, Advanced Science, Small, or Advanced Materials Interfaces. Diagnoses venue fit; does not write or characterize the material.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md5.3 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Advanced Materials Scope Fit (advmat-scope-fit)

When to trigger

  • You suspect the work is solid but may be "incremental optimization"
  • You cannot articulate why a materials scientist outside your subfield should care
  • A coauthor asks "Adv. Mater. or Adv. Funct. Mater.?"
  • An editor has previously bounced similar work on novelty/impact grounds
  • Before investing in cover-quality figures and full characterization, you want a go / no-go on venue

The two-part gate (both must pass)

Advanced Materials publishes across all of materials science — materials chemistry, nanotechnology, energy materials (batteries, photovoltaics, catalysis), electronics and optoelectronics, biomaterials, soft matter, and structural materials. The gate is two tests, AND-ed:

  1. Genuine advance — Is there a new material, a new mechanism, or a new property/performance regime — not an incremental gain on an existing system? A record efficiency alone is not an advance if it comes from routine tuning; a new design principle that unlocks it is.
  2. Broad impact — Would researchers in a neighboring materials community (or a device/application field) find this consequential? An advance is broad if it transfers a design rule, opens a new material class, or resets a performance–property trade-off others were stuck on.

A careful, well-characterized, but incremental result can pass rigor and still fail the gate. That is the most common Adv. Mater. rejection mode, and it is a venue judgment, not a quality judgment.

Decision table

SituationVerdict
New material class or design principle + clear cross-field relevanceAdv. Mater. — strong fit
New mechanism explaining a property, with general design consequencesAdv. Mater. — strong fit
Record device metric driven by a genuinely new material/interface conceptAdv. Mater. — fit (frame the advance)
Solid performance gain by established optimization on a known systemAdv. Funct. Mater. (functional focus)
Rigorous nanoscale study, well-defined but specialist audienceSmall
Sound, broad, but best served by gold open access and rapid disseminationAdvanced Science
Interface / thin-film / surface study, incremental or specialistAdvanced Materials Interfaces
Characterization-only paper with no property or device consequenceSpecialist / methods journal

How to stress-test the gate

  • The neighbor test: name a specific researcher in a different materials subfield and state, in one sentence, why they would read this. If you cannot, broad impact is weak.
  • The design-rule test: does the paper hand the reader a transferable rule ("do X to the lattice/interface and Y follows"), or just one more optimized sample? A rule travels; a sample does not.
  • The trade-off test: does the advance break a known property trade-off (strength vs. ductility, efficiency vs. stability, conductivity vs. transparency)? Breaking one is a classic Adv. Mater. story.
  • The "so a record?" test: if the headline is "highest X to date," ask what new material physics or chemistry produced it. No new principle → likely a functional/specialist venue.

Checklist

  • The single central advance is stated in one sentence (new material / mechanism / property)
  • The advance is distinguished from incremental optimization, explicitly
  • Broad impact is named for a concrete out-of-subfield or device audience
  • You can name the design rule or trade-off the result changes
  • You have honestly considered AFM / Adv. Sci. / Small / AMI as the better venue
  • If borderline, you have an impact argument ready for the cover letter

Anti-patterns

  • Equating a record number with an advance — Adv. Mater. rewards the new principle behind the number
  • Claiming broad impact by listing applications the material has not been shown to enable
  • "Salami-slicing" a broader study into a thin Communication to chase the venue
  • Submitting an optimization paper reframed with impact language but no new material science
  • Ignoring that editors desk-reject on novelty/impact before any characterization is read

Output format

【Central advance】one sentence (new material / mechanism / property)
【Not incremental because】...
【Broad impact】named out-of-subfield or device audience + why they care
【Design rule / trade-off changed】...
【Verdict】Adv. Mater. strong / Adv. Mater. with impact framing / retarget to AFM / Adv. Sci. / Small / AMI
【Next】advmat-results-framing (if Adv. Mater.) or retarget venue

Scope and portfolio positioning are durable, but article categories and sibling-journal remits evolve — verify on the official Wiley Advanced Materials author page.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Use when packaging AAAI code, data, multimedia appendices, technical appendices, reproducibility evidence, and post-acceptance artifact releases without violating double-blind or immutable-supplement rules.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when drafting an AAAI author response (rebuttal) under the single short character-limited author-feedback window, the no-URL rule, no-new-results guidance, AI-generated-review handling, and the AAAI two-phase review process where Phase-2 papers receive one feedback round before SPC/AC discussion.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when preparing an accepted AAAI paper for camera-ready source submission to AAAI Press, including proceedings page limits, two-column template compliance, copyright transfer, purchased extra technical pages, deanonymization, registration, oral or poster presentation, and final public artifact release.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when designing or auditing AAAI experiments for the broad-AI program committee, including baselines, ablations, statistical significance, robustness, human evaluation, AI-for-Social-Impact and alignment/safety evidence, compute and cost reporting, and reproducibility-checklist alignment for Phase-1 survival.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when positioning an AAAI paper's novelty against archival work, contemporaneous arXiv or workshop papers, and AAAI/IJCAI/NeurIPS/ICML/ICLR neighbors across the broad AI scope, while staying inside AAAI's dual-submission and AI-as-source policy constraints and writing a related-work section legible to non-specialist reviewers.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

Use when strengthening an AAAI paper's reproducibility checklist (placed after references), experimental traceability, seed and hyperparameter reporting, compute and cost disclosure, dataset access and licensing, code/data ZIP readiness, and the claim-to-evidence map that Phase-1 reviewers use to judge rigor across AAAI's broad AI scope.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1,2482026年9月27日 更新

brycewang-stanford のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する